IS THE COALITION GREEN ENOUGH?

The BBC has been digesting the budget and I was a tad surprised to hear none other than Chris Huhne invited on the Today programme this morning around 6.45am to give his judgement on the green credentials of the Coalition. The swivel eyed eco-loon former jail bird Huhne is hardly a bastion of balanced opinion but Evan Davies nonetheless was happy to let him ramble.

20 Responses to IS THE COALITION GREEN ENOUGH?

I heard the interview. What struck me most about it was the fact that in their feeble efforts to find someone – in this case quite literally anyone – to criticise the coalition’s ‘green’ policies, the best the BBC could do was to dredge up some discredited, perjuring, dishonest has-been who is no longer in government and therefore might turn up to the opening of a paper bag in order to get some face-time on air.

Still Evan Davies seems happy enough to call this kind of thing professional journalism. Who are we to argue?

In other climate related news, I was delighted to learn that the prestigious APS (American Physical Society) is conducting its review of its climate change position, as it is want to do every 5 years.

The way that they are doing so this time around actually gives me hope that science, and not political dogma, will be at the heart of the considerations.

They have appointed a panel of 6 distinguished experts to consider this and 3 of those are actually well known sceptics, and 3 are alarmists. All discussions are recorded noterised and available online.

IF (and it is a pretty big if) this review concludes that the science is not as settled as we were led to believe and that the alarmist scenarios cannot be validated by actual observed evidence, then this could be the first crack in the false consensus which has been constructed around a hypothesis, which is increasingly being falsified by observable evidence. Once the APS turns sceptic, (as ALL science should be), there will be increasing pressure on other global leading science institutions to likewise re-examine their positions. Then we go after the politicians.

What worries me, is the damage to the reputation of science itself. In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with science and the scientific method is the only strong and dependable method of truth-based, unbiased discovery.

But it only works when scientists stick to it in a very strict manner. Climate scientists have abused the scientific method and turned it on its head, placing hypothesis based model runs as proof, and ignoring observable evidence which falsifies the hypothesis.

The fact is that as far as I can see, the only members of parliament who are also scientists, are also the most sceptical sceptics in parliament, in fact the chemist and Labour MP Graham Stringer is the only MP who seems to be on the ball, when it comes to the up to date science.

The only type of scientist who would be better qualified than an Atmospheric physicist when it comes to the core basics of calibrating carbon dioxide warming, would be a chemist.

Indications are that even Labour MP,s on these committees do not like the feeling of being fooled by corrupt scientists with a vested interest in this scam.

There seems to be something going on between British Mensa and government committees, over the “BBC morons” problem that was revealed in that W1A documentary, which the “BBC morons” think is a satirical comedy.

The space special interest group newsletter of Mensa included an article by a member who complained to the BBC, called “BBC Censorship” which mentions that Mensa member John Whittingdale studied Astronomy at university.

I have been emailing members for more information, but have only been sent some interesting updates on what causes Climate Change, and how you can also predict Global cooling, see below.

Before stringing up the politicians and their grant-corrupted scientists, let us please reserve a lamppost or two for the BBC’s so-called “environmental journalists” who kept misinforming us at our own expense. They knew, and if the didn’t, they ought to have.

Talking of grant corrupted scientists……how about the fee hungry universties? When student fees were announced, the brass at the ivory towers must have dropped to their knees, hands clasped, at the thought of the revenue from said fees, millions…….hence these ridiculous degree courses in tourism, sports science, navel-gazing….you get my point! Meanwhile……youngsters, puffed up about going to Uni, get into terrible debt….leave….job? Not a chance….they have been betrayed, by Labour, the Uni’s and so on….poor sods. Owen Jones got to Oxford……tells you all you need to know about standards eh?……Banker level salaries for Uni luminaries…..the rot goes on….

OK it isn’t. But he must be down to his last couple of million with only a consultancy or two, the odd chairmanship and a column in The Guardian to keep the roof over his several properties.

But. look surely we can trust what he has to say, after all he only broke the speed limit.

Oh and then he lied that he was driving the car. Then he conspired with his wife to make a false statement to the police and carried on lying and lying up to the court room steps. Now his son won’t talk to him and calls him a count (silent O).

And then when he got out in a great example of contrition he blamed it all on the Murdoch press.

Good idea to introduce ALL BBC hacks, hangers-on serial mouthpieces, ciphers and moochers-and those that boomerang and bungee jump between charity, universities/Polys think tanks and Labour-Liberal organs and agencies like the Guardian and the LSE etc.
Great idea-by the time these caveats and qualifying remarks were done….there`d be not time to blather crapulence by way of “news, analysis and comment”.
Except for Melanie Phillips or Peter Hitchens, Douglas Murray and David Elstein.

Well it would make a change. They do always preface any press release from any right wing think tank as calling it “a right wing think tank” fair enough, but they often neglect to give left wing think tanks or left wing political charities the same identifiers, instead merely naming them.

6.45 am eh?…an early release of the old lag, so as not to get us all down to BH with (energy-efficient) burning torches and (sustainable, tempered) pitchforks I`d imagine.
Tradesmans entrance for Huhne…which may well mean something different to him than it does to Evan Davis, but WGAFF.
Did he drive himself there?…or was on Pete Burns number plates I wonder?
And-how much did he get?…wasn`t he in the Carribean recently….oh those airmiles!
Next DG of the BBC perhaps…well off the hypocrisy scale required of BBC gentry.